WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court has ruled in favor of Medtronic Plc in a lengthy patent lawsuit involving the company and Colibri Heart Valve LLC, reversing a jury’s decision that charged Medtronic with inducing patent infringement concerning artificial heart valves.
The case centered on Colibri’s U.S. patent No. 8,900,294, which describes a technique for partially deploying and recapturing an artificial heart valve during implantation. This method allows surgeons to reposition the valve if its initial placement is not optimal, effectively providing a “do-over” during surgery.
Colibri accused Medtronic of promoting this technique through its CoreValve devices, alleging that the company violated patent law by encouraging surgeons to engage in such methods. Initially, the patent application included two deployment techniques: a push-based method and a retraction-based method, where the sheath is pulled back to expose the valve. However, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected the retraction claim, leading to its removal from the patent.
During the trial, Medtronic contended that its devices utilized the retraction method, not the push method that was protected under the patent. In response, Colibri shifted its legal strategy, abandoning its literal infringement claim and relying on the doctrine of equivalents. This principle allows for finding infringement even if the accused method isn’t identical to the patented one, provided it serves a similar function in a comparable manner.
The jury initially ruled in favor of Colibri, awarding the company over $106 million in damages while dismissing Medtronic’s arguments, including its claim that prosecution history estoppel should prevent Colibri from using the doctrine of equivalents.
Prosecution history estoppel is a legal doctrine that limits a patent owner’s ability to reclaim rights lost during the patent application process. On appeal, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the jury’s ruling. The court determined that Colibri’s decision to abandon the retraction claim and its acknowledgment of overlap with the push-based claim activated prosecution history estoppel, thereby inhibiting Colibri’s ability to argue infringement based on the doctrine of equivalents.
The ruling established that no infringement occurred in this case, effectively nullifying the original district court’s decision and vacating the $106 million award.
In related news, Medtronic and its subsidiary, Given Imaging Inc., issued safety letters in June to customers regarding Bravo CF Capsule Delivery Devices, advising that certain units should not be used due to production issues impacting their adhesive application potentially interfering with the devices’ performance.
Medtronic’s recent financial results indicate growth, with its cardiovascular segment reporting $3.34 billion in revenue for the fourth quarter of 2025, marking a 6.6% increase year-over-year, and 7.8% growth on an organic basis.
MDT shares moved up 0.78% to $90.31 during the last trading session on Monday.
This article was automatically written by Open AI, and the people, facts, circumstances, and story may be inaccurate. Any article can be requested for removal, retraction, or correction by writing an email to contact@publiclawlibrary.org.